New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-02-16
DIR. FU.NK,S OPEN LETTER

DR.. l. X. Funk, in an "Opcn letter" to pr.
Crosby. attempts to justify the course of the
Frohibitionists in allying themselves with the
liquor men to beat the High-Liccnsc bill at
Albany. His argument presents few new feat
ucS, but us representative specimen of the
hackncyed fallacics and misstatcmcnts upon
which the third party depends, 1t is deserving
OF some examination. OF course, he sets out
with the old and altogether erroneous assertion
that high license is permit and sanction II
is pity that DIR. Funk has not studied law n
little. If he had he would perhaps he candid
enough to drop this particular misIcprcsenta-
ton. The truth is that the right to sell liquor
is common law right. long antcdating all.
measures of regulation. The truth also is that
license legislation is always restraint and not
permission. This principle has been declared
repeatedly by American appellate courts, and
if the editor Of the Prohibition organ does not
know ii the fact shows with what looscness and
rccl1cssnoss he discharges his journalistic func-
tons. Instead of high license being what DR..
Funk calls it, ga legal recognition of the right
of the saloon to exist it is therefore rcstrc-
ton of right which previously existed under
the common law, and it is a recognition of the
fact that the saloon docs not stand on all fours
with innocent business, but calls for special
regulation because of its dangerous character.
SO much for the attempt of DR.. Funk to
justify the PrOhibitionist opposition to high
license on pscudo-mor;ll and pseudo-lcgal
grounds. We may refer him to the decisions
Of the Supreme Court Of Michigan and the SUI
prcmc Court of Illinois, among others, for con-
irmatiOn of the fact that a license tax is re-
gaIdcd by the law Il restraint and not n
permission. This branch Of the Doctors argu-
ncnt hcing Oh posed Of. there remains the plea
that high license docs not diminish drinking
or even reduce the number Of saloons. To
prove this assertion statistics of the saloon
business in Chicago are cited. Well, we set
against them the Judgment Of the Chicago
press The Chicago Tribune > of the lIth
instant Gays in an editorial article: "Impcsing
n $500 tax on lQuor-sclng in Illinois three
years ago closed 500 saloons in Chicago and
over 5000 in the State, and prohibited the
keepers thereof from engaging longer in vcnd-
ing intoxicants." The same journal also SAYS,
speaking Of course. from local experience :
Taxation. when applied with sufficient rgor.
constitutes the most effective form of prohibi-
tion." In effect. high license is practical and
effective. IL saves money and friction TO the
State by collecting the penalties Of liquor-scll-
ing in advance 1t obyiatcs the danger Of i'm
mInlty for liquor-scl'ing which is inscparablc
from jury trials for breach Of law after the
fact and il restraints traffic which, as all -
pcrlcncc proves, cannot rs yet bc put an end to
in large cities if anywhere Thus it follows
that Dr. Funk's arguments are fatally defect
i've and that should have been expected of at
tcmpts 10 bolster up and give the color of con-
siStcncy and morality TO the most markedly pre-.
poStcrous and sclfcontradictory position a third
party ever put itself in.
II is unfortunately altogether too plain that
the Prohibiionists arc in alliance with the rum
power. There they stand, fighting high license
under the fm>icst Of prcicxts and yanly try
ing TO make II appear that they are advocating
free rum out Of pure loathing for intcmpcrancc
Put it will not do Neither DR.. Funk nor eny
other Prohibidonst can make ont Of the sit
La,on anything clsc than what il really is. and
that is an "unholy alliance" The Doctor.
who is nothing if not slippery, has recourse
finally TO n stale political trick lie says:
~ cannot support your bill, but here is another
bill which, if you will substitute for IL. | will
withdraw my opposition" No doubt DR.. Funk
can have the assistance Of his saloon keeping
friends in urging this swapping of horses while
crossing the stream. They want nothing bet
ter than such a diversion as will weaken the
temperance attack now being directed through
the IIigh-Liccnsc bill. The measure he pro-
poses is impracticablc, and he knows IT, High
license is practicable and effective, and the best
possible proof of that, and Of the falsity of
nr. Funks gloomy. predictions about it, is the
fact that the liquor-mcn are resisting its enact
pcnt with all their energies and declaring,
with unmstakablc sincerity. that its passage
will strike a heavy blow at their trade.
ARBOR DAY
A bill was introduced in the Icpisloturc last